Involvement in Codeine Cough Syrup Trafficking and Requirement for Custodial Interrogation Cited as Reasons for Bail Denial
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has denied anticipatory bail to Lakshya Yadav, who is implicated in a high-profile narcotics case involving the alleged trafficking of codeine-based cough syrup. The case, registered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, has drawn considerable attention due to the commercial quantity of narcotics involved and the alleged network of transactions linked to the accused.
Presiding over the matter, Justice Jitendra Kumar Sinha heard arguments from both sides before concluding that the anticipatory bail application lacked merit. Representing Yadav, Senior Counsel D.K. Srivastava, assisted by Ms. Disha Srivastava, argued that Yadav was falsely implicated and was merely a student with no direct involvement in the narcotics operation. They contended that the codeine syrup was recovered from premises rented out by Yadav’s mother to a co-accused and asserted that no monetary transactions were linked to Yadav personally.
Conversely, the Additional Advocate General presented a compelling case against the bail application. The court was informed of Yadav's alleged involvement in the procurement and distribution network of codeine syrup through Syndicate Enterprises, a firm linked to his father. The prosecution underscored the necessity for custodial interrogation, citing that Yadav remained in constant contact with key figures in the alleged narcotics operations, as evidenced by call detail records. Moreover, the magnitude of the offense, highlighted by the commercial quantity of narcotics involved, invoked the bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act against granting bail.
The court’s decision reflects a stringent stance on narcotics-related offenses, emphasizing the need for thorough investigation and the role of custodial interrogation in uncovering larger trafficking networks. Justice Sinha, while dismissing the bail application, noted the seriousness of the charges and the evidence gathered during the investigation, including the financial transactions and the look-out circular issued against Yadav.
This judgment reaffirms the legal principles governing the NDPS Act, particularly the stringent conditions under which bail can be granted in cases involving commercial quantities of narcotics. As the investigation progresses, the case will continue to be closely watched, given its implications for narcotics control and legal precedents in similar cases.
Bottom Line:
Anticipatory bail under NDPS Act was denied considering the commercial quantity of codeine cough syrup recovered, involvement of the applicant, and requirement for custodial interrogation.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 8, 21, 22, 29, and 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
Lakshya Yadav v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2848655
